Body language experts are trained to look for groups of behaviors. Often, certain behaviors such as crossed arms could just mean the subject is cold. It is also hard to judge someone's body language after you have just met them; it is much better to compare their behavior to the "baseline" of their normal behavior. That is because certain behaviors are not innate but learned unconsciously from parents, relatives, close friends, and is also dependent upon regional culture. If you want to learn about body language, you should spend a lot of time practicing watching several different people and finding groups of behaviors that signal their respective moods before you start to start to make inferences with confidence. It is helpful to watch people from different cultures or different classes so that you may see how much variation there is. Otherwise, decisions made with little knowledge and practice is actually harmful because your inferences will likely be wrong. "You should never cross your arms again" may be good advice, but only because you can then guard yourself from people that overestimate their powers of observation.
Good point. For example, I tend to lean forward (with forearms on the table) out of respect. It shows I'm interested but I can see how it could be misconstrued as a nervousness, or 'low-power'.
But isn't giving respect low-power? If you're the alpha, others give you respect, and you do as you please. I'm exaggerating, obviously, but respect is a form of deference. Deference is low-power.
I disagree. If you're the alpha, others give you respect, but this doesn't imply that you can't show respect to others. Respect is not only a form of deference. It is also a form of understanding.
I know what you mean, but given the context of a job interview, by definition[1] you are in a lower power position.
I agree with sibling comments, though, that respectfulness is not mutually exclusive with alpha-ness. And if in general you are a respectful person, a high-power posture will probably not impact their opinion of your respectfulness too much.
[1] Assuming you really want the job and unless you are a hot shot who is gracing them with your willingness to work for them.
Although you're partially right, I wouldn't say you are necessarily in a lower power position. They want to hire you (assuming you are up to snuff) just as much as you want to be hired. Assuming an "equal-power" position shows you believe you are capable of filling the role, and deserve it. It also suggests you would be perfectly okay with NOT getting the job if it doesn't work out.
I've gone into every job interview I've had with the attitude that I'm a hot shot who is gracing my employer with my willingness to work for them[1]. I've gotten offers at about 50% of them, which means that I've turned down more companies than have turned down me.
Confidence really does work. If you sincerely believe in your abilities, it's much easier to convince others to believe in them.
[1] This is not mutually exclusive with respect or humility. It's quite possible to believe you have a lot to offer your employer while also believing they have a lot to offer you, and then the job interview process is just a matter of negotiating the right fit.
Interesting. Whenever I see aggressive confidence in an interviewee, I immediately think Dunning-Kruger because statistically it's by far the most likely cause. Either way it's down to empirical evidence though.
Anyway, as far as anecdotal evidence goes, I tend to intentionally give off a pretty neutral vibe and rarely worry about flunking an interview. (I chalk it up to mad skillz rather than body language though.)
One could also argue that your willingness to quickly diagnose an individual coping with a traditionally high-anxiety situation (interviewing) with trendy cognitive bias issues calls your ability to recognize your own weaknesses into question.
I don't think a job interview puts you in a lower-power position by definition, though I admit that there does seem to be a lot of social conditioning to make people believe this is always true.
The power dynamics depends a lot on the specific market conditions at a given point in time. If demand is low and supply is high, you do have a power disadvantage, but its just as possible to see the reverse where the employer is at a disadvantage.
The typical HN reader is more likely to be familiar with the latter than the former. Not because we are all hot shots, but because our industry is presently in high demand and has a low supply of labour.
Power is the ability to coerce through action or threat of action on those issues that you care about or in certain spheres of influence.
So, no, this doesn't mean constant domination. But that's largely due to the fact that the powerful won't generally expend their resources on issues they don't care about. As soon as you disagree or oppose them on an issue that they do care about, though, they will try to dominate you.
EDIT> Also, a person may have power within one sphere, but not another. A classic mistake is not realizing who you're dealing with / what the realities of the situation are.
> But that's largely due to the fact that the powerful won't generally expend their resources on issues they don't care about.
Explaining why something isn't true doesn't suddenly make it true. Yes. Powerful people know better than to constantly dominate. That's why the popular psychological pseudoscience of "alpha behavior" is smoke and bullshit.
High-power behavior? Having the self-assurance to exhibit low-power behavior when they feel like it. Low-power behavior? Attempting to exhibit high-power behavior when they don't have what it takes to back it up.
See how this gets circular and pointless very, very fast?
